Jophiel wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
By your logic the war in Iraq is comparable to World War 2 or the American Revolution
Yeah, when I heard that analogy my reaction was, "And which side are we, this time?"
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- So... good luck with that!
So... good luck with that!Follow
I dunno... Bush was, rather amusingly, try to cast the Iraq conflict into the same light as the Revolution this past July 4th. Just in case Saddam/Hitler comparisons weren't strained enough, now we have the insurgents playing the role of the British Empire in this noble battle.
Yeah, when I heard that analogy my reaction was, "And which side are we, this time?"
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Smash wrote:
Your son died in Iraq?
So its only an objectionable practice when one's son dies in a war. Gotcha.
Smash wrote:
Yes, but probably not with the expectation that he'd be put into that situation for no reason.
Keep sticking with the whole "no reason" thing. It works, really. Repetition is sure to wear me down and make me think its all been for naught. Hammer on!
Smash wrote:
Period.
Saying it emphatically doesn't make it so. I know you like to think it does, but it doesn't. The entire world believed that Sadaam had weapons of mass destruction. The only debate was over what to do about it. The execution may have been inept, but the act of going to war was appropriate. Most appropriate? Perhaps not, but appopriate none the less.
Smash wrote:
Their sacrifices *are* trivial.
Then so must be all of the souls buried in Europe. It must be nice to be able to sit in an Ivory Tower believing that we have no more obligation to oppressed people in the world. Personally, I believe the big stick requires that it be used.
Quote:
Do well for who? You, because you wouldn't have to think about the pointless deaths of thousands of people as much? You disagree with her political philosophy, so somehow you envision this gives you the right to judge her? By your own horribly @#%^ed up logic and morals, shouldn't the facts of what shes been through prevent you from doing so?
Shouldn't the fact that her son died for his country while you sat home and played video games prevent you from insulting her personally for standing up for what she believes? I guess not. I guess what you believe is that is everyone's pain and personal beliefs are meaningless if they're not yours, and that's the whole political philosophy of the right, isn't it? Give me everything, take from everyone else.
Shouldn't the fact that her son died for his country while you sat home and played video games prevent you from insulting her personally for standing up for what she believes? I guess not. I guess what you believe is that is everyone's pain and personal beliefs are meaningless if they're not yours, and that's the whole political philosophy of the right, isn't it? Give me everything, take from everyone else.
I have no problem thinking about the dead and the reasons for their situation. I have no problem resolving the disconnect between the popular and the correct, either. You like to castigate Republicans and conservatives for their views and the positions we take because to you we are nothing more than brain-dead rednecks who miss the leaps your personal views allow you to take. You call us cowards for supporting our president and out troops on a mission you don't agree with because it makes you feel better about yourself and your intellectual refutation of the premise of conflict.
I have no problem with people who are against the war and vocal about it. I simply take issue with people who make themselves out to be more important than they are, who hold their own pain and suffering out to be something greater than anyone else has had to bear. I have a big problem with people who think that they have some unique and world-changing perspective simply because they hurt and can't get past it.
Ms. Sheehan is entitled to every opinion that she has ever had. What she is not entitled to is the idea that hers are paramount. If she was as influential as you make her out to be or as she'd like to be, the war would be over and our troops would already be headed home. That it is, and they are, not is testament to how stupid her demands really are.
Since we're flogging this rented one trick pony for every thing it’s worth, suffice it to say that the Iraq war is far from over. Take that to mean you foresee it dragging on and on or that the outcome is yet undetermined-- take your pick.
Regardless, claiming that an opinion is fact to give your opinion more weight smacks of verbal laziness or an attempt to gain verisimilitude. Either way, it's intellectually dishonest. Particularly from someone who is as sharp as Smasharoo is.
Totem
Regardless, claiming that an opinion is fact to give your opinion more weight smacks of verbal laziness or an attempt to gain verisimilitude. Either way, it's intellectually dishonest. Particularly from someone who is as sharp as Smasharoo is.
Totem
Totem wrote:
Particularly from someone who is as sharp as Smasharoo is.
*sigh* Complimenting him, even back-handedly, only makes his head bigger. He's not all the bright, he is simply unique in his ability to memorize a thesaurus while ignoring a dictionary.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Ha ha, Nexa, I'm picturing this over-inflated Irish, thus potato-shaped balloon zooming all over his room propelled by escaping air leaking out of its nozzle.
Totem
Totem
10 posts
HA HA...one rabid nutwing liberal deserves another.
Smashed,
Yes we know to you whacko liberals courage is hiding behind the umbrella of the US military spouting how the war against radical islam is lost and Iraq is a waste of time. Nevermind that "suddenly" Iraq is a hotbed of terrorists even though we know not one of them existed before our liberation.
But hey you go right on believing Sheehan is engaging in something heroic. I hope she wins in a landslide so that she can spew her illogical emotion driven rabid left wing vitriol for all to see.
When Sheehan goes over to Iraq to protest the war then i'll be impressed, until then she's just another whacked out liberal mom. Is there any wonder her son ran from her as fast as he could?
Varus
Smashed,
Quote:
You, for instance. I'm not a Cindy Sheean supporter or apologist, but facts are facts. What she decided to do to deal with the loss of her son took great courage.
Yes we know to you whacko liberals courage is hiding behind the umbrella of the US military spouting how the war against radical islam is lost and Iraq is a waste of time. Nevermind that "suddenly" Iraq is a hotbed of terrorists even though we know not one of them existed before our liberation.
But hey you go right on believing Sheehan is engaging in something heroic. I hope she wins in a landslide so that she can spew her illogical emotion driven rabid left wing vitriol for all to see.
When Sheehan goes over to Iraq to protest the war then i'll be impressed, until then she's just another whacked out liberal mom. Is there any wonder her son ran from her as fast as he could?
Varus
So its only an objectionable practice when one's son dies in a war. Gotcha
Of course not, it's just much more cowardly then. Do you see why?
Keep sticking with the whole "no reason" thing. It works, really. Repetition is sure to wear me down and make me think its all been for naught. Hammer on!
I'm not trying to wear you down, it's not my fault that you continue to ignore something very simple with no counter argument. Please explain to me the reason her son died. and why you think it was a valid decision to put his life at risk.
Saying it emphatically doesn't make it so. I know you like to think it does, but it doesn't. The entire world believed that Sadaam had weapons of mass destruction. The only debate was over what to do about it. The execution may have been inept, but the act of going to war was appropriate. Most appropriate? Perhaps not, but appopriate none the less.
I was unaware that a nation state possessing weapons of mass destruction was an appropriate reason to go to war. If this is the case, it would be appropriate to you for the US to go to war with France, China, the UK, India, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, Israel, North Korea, Japan, etc. etc.
Let's set that aside for a moment, though, and let me crystallize one part of your argument here. Are you asserting that the reason the US went to war with Iraq was because they had weapons of mass destruction? Because the people who decided to go war with Iraq are on record as disagreeing with you.
Please let me know.
Then so must be all of the souls buried in Europe. It must be nice to be able to sit in an Ivory Tower believing that we have no more obligation to oppressed people in the world. Personally, I believe the big stick requires that it be used.
Contrary to what you may think, we likely have similar views of the uses of military power. What I find baffling is that you can somehow find invading a nation state so low on the list of both threats to US interests and human rights abuses while ignoring others that were much more oppressive and posed a far greater threat appropriate. Also that the execution of the invasion is apparently meaningless to you. Let's take it to a ludicrous extreme for a moment to establish that execution matters *at least somewhat*.
Can we both agree that if one person was sent with a machete to invade North Korea, and that person died that his death would be without reason? That the people who came to the decision to invade a country I think we'd both agree is both oppressive and a threat to US interests bore some responsibility for his death and it's futility because of their poor planning? Because with obvious differences of scale, even if invading Iraq was mandatory US interests, that's what has happened with this war.
I have no problem thinking about the dead and the reasons for their situation. I have no problem resolving the disconnect between the popular and the correct, either. You like to castigate Republicans and conservatives for their views and the positions we take because to you we are nothing more than brain-dead rednecks who miss the leaps your personal views allow you to take. You call us cowards for supporting our president and out troops on a mission you don't agree with because it makes you feel better about yourself and your intellectual refutation of the premise of conflict.
No, I call you cowards for not doing anything while justifying the deaths of those who do when they are pointless. Mainly because it's a cowardly thing to do. It's a cowardly thing for Democrats who think the war is uselessly killing Americans to elect people they know won't force a stop to it, but we do it. Cowardice knows no party affiliation. Cowardice is generally the normal state of human affairs. If it weren't, bravery wouldn't be so highly respected.
I have no problem with people who are against the war and vocal about it. I simply take issue with people who make themselves out to be more important than they are, who hold their own pain and suffering out to be something greater than anyone else has had to bear.
That's all well and good, but the reality is that this person's suffering does happen to be more than you've had to bear during this war. Her voice regarding this war is more important than yours. She has more of a stake.
I have a big problem with people who think that they have some unique and world-changing perspective simply because they hurt and can't get past it.
They do. It is world changing to a mother when her son dies in a war.
Ms. Sheehan is entitled to every opinion that she has ever had. What she is not entitled to is the idea that hers are paramount. If she was as influential as you make her out to be or as she'd like to be, the war would be over and our troops would already be headed home. That it is, and they are, not is testament to how stupid her demands really are.
I don't think she's particularly influential at all. I think if you actually read my posts, you'd notice that I only pointed out that the fact that favor for this war has fallen while she campaigned against it is likely to make *her* think she's been very influential, and that it would be difficult for anyone in her situation to think otherwise. When you advocate for something and your position is unpopular when you begin, but then becomes popular, it would be almost impossible not to think you caused it to some degree.
What you're asking is for her to be some superhuman who can truly objectively asses her own impact on the issue that's become the most important thing in her life. The idea that is even possible is not only ludicrous in the extreme but also shockingly naive. You're essentially criticizing a woman who has lost a child for being a human being, yet you don't see how it's cowardly. People wonder why Republicans are seen as uncaring and out of touch? This is why.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
*sigh* Complimenting him, even back-handedly, only makes his head bigger. He's not all the bright, he is simply unique in his ability to memorize a thesaurus while ignoring a dictionary.
Didn't one of the Hepburn sisters say that about Humphrey Bogart?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
*sigh* Complimenting him, even back-handedly, only makes his head bigger. He's not all the bright, he is simply unique in his ability to memorize a thesaurus while ignoring a dictionary.
Didn't one of the Hepburn sisters say that about Humphrey Bogart?
Don't you owe me a dollar?
I needed a new sig anyway.
Nexa
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.â€
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
Quote:
I have a big problem with people who think that they have some unique and world-changing perspective simply because they hurt and can't get past it.
Yet those are the very people who do change the world. Not typically by camping in front of a rancher's seldom-used second (or third, as it may be) home; I grant you that.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Quote:
Yet those are the very people who do change the world.
Gotta love the Brady bill.
This is what Cindy Sheehan wrote when she decided to re-enter the fray.
Quote:
Tuesday 03 July 2007 I'm not backing off. I tried to remove myself from the political realm of the US, which BushCo is turning into an Evil Empire, but the blatant audacity of George commuting Scooter's sentence (he's not ruling out a full pardon - and you know he will) has dragged me kicking and screaming back in. I can't sit back and let this BushCo drag our country further down into the murky quagmire of Fascism and violence, taking the rest of the world with them!
I have sat quietly back these past five weeks as the slaughter in Iraq sorrowfully surges along with George's bloody escalation - and as the philosophical opposition to the war has soared to almost four out of every five Americans. I have remained silent when Senator Barack Obama said that impeachment is only reserved for "grave, grave" breeches! Well, BushCo has created hundreds of thousands of graves dug by their lies and greed. For cripes' sake, George admitted to breaking the FISA Act (which is a felony) that also breeched the 4th Amendment to our Constitution that already prohibited illegal search and seizure. How was Bill Clinton's offense graver than George's, ****'s, or Scooter's? Did we ever think that the criminality and arrogance of the Nixon White House would be eclipsed in our time with nary a "baaaah" from the Sheeple in Congress?
George has said that America doesn't "do torture" when we have all seen the images of torture from Abu Ghraib (don't believe your lyin' eyes) and know that hundreds of people sold to the US Army for an immoral bounty are incarcerated within the inhumane confines of Guantanamo Prison which is right in our own back yard.
I have had to bite my tongue - HARD - as the George and **** crime cabal, (formerly known has the executive branch) have claimed that their offices are not to be held up to the same standards of accountability and control as any other entity in the human race - governmental or private.
It has been recently reported that Nancy Pelosi said that impeachment is not "worth it." Her faulty reasoning is that impeachment would take too much time because they don't have the votes. If they could "whip" their own Democratic caucus into shape to defend and protect our Constitution and the people of Iraq and our soldiers as they whupped, cajoled, threatened and browbeat the caucus into attaching "non-binding" time lines onto the last war funding bill, then impeachment would not only be possible, but likely.
The recent commutation of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's sentence, however, was the straw that broke my camel's back of exhausted ennui. Patrick Fitzgerald is a thoughtful and thorough prosecutor who did a heroic job of bringing at least one of the Bush Crime Mob to justice. Even though we were all very pleased, we knew that it was not enough and that Mr. Fitzgerald would delve deeper into the *****-infested executive branch. The lawlessness of the Bush administration has reached Wild West proportions and the inmates definitely have control of the US(A)sylum.
A very dear friend of mine, Rev. Lennox Yearwood of the Hip Hop Caucus, is being harassed by the Air Force for "Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentleman" because "The Rev" fulfills his duty as an Officer and a Gentleman honorably by protesting Iraq and the Fascist Bush Regime almost constantly. The Rev is still in the Individual Ready Reserve, so the Air Force believes it is within its parameters to pursue the charges, although every "Officer and Gentleman(woman)" should be protesting the atrocious mistakes in the Middle East. After The Rev's hearing on July 12, (in Macon, Georgia) he is going to begin a "symbolic" walk from the Reverend Martin Luther King's grave (Atlanta, Georgia) to DC - I am going to be there for him and to begin the march, but I am not going to make it symbolic.
We are going to walk from Atlanta, Georgia, to Congress beginning July 13 and ending up in DC on July 23 to send the mis-leaders back home to face the music of justice in their own districts.
It is about time us "peasants" (in the eyes of the Fascist Ruling Elite) march on DC with our "pitchforks" of righteous anger and our "torches" of truth to demand the ouster of BushCo. I have a dream of the detention centers that George has built and filled being instead filled with Orange Clad neocons and neoconnettes.
If Congress won't dig BushCo's political grave, it is the People's job to do so. Thomas Jefferson said that we need a Revolution every 20 years or so, to keep our Republic honest. Over 225 years have passed since our last Revolution (if you don't count the War Between the States) and we are long overdue for one. Turn off your TVs, kiss your pets goodbye, bring the kids and flock to the federal seat of corruption, or join us on our walk there, for a People's Accountability Movement to be in the face of the Criminal BushCo and the Complicit Congress for the last week of session before they go on their undeserved vacations (why do they get vacations when the Iraqi parliamentarians don't?)
On the eve of our first revolution: You know it's right!
I have sat quietly back these past five weeks as the slaughter in Iraq sorrowfully surges along with George's bloody escalation - and as the philosophical opposition to the war has soared to almost four out of every five Americans. I have remained silent when Senator Barack Obama said that impeachment is only reserved for "grave, grave" breeches! Well, BushCo has created hundreds of thousands of graves dug by their lies and greed. For cripes' sake, George admitted to breaking the FISA Act (which is a felony) that also breeched the 4th Amendment to our Constitution that already prohibited illegal search and seizure. How was Bill Clinton's offense graver than George's, ****'s, or Scooter's? Did we ever think that the criminality and arrogance of the Nixon White House would be eclipsed in our time with nary a "baaaah" from the Sheeple in Congress?
George has said that America doesn't "do torture" when we have all seen the images of torture from Abu Ghraib (don't believe your lyin' eyes) and know that hundreds of people sold to the US Army for an immoral bounty are incarcerated within the inhumane confines of Guantanamo Prison which is right in our own back yard.
I have had to bite my tongue - HARD - as the George and **** crime cabal, (formerly known has the executive branch) have claimed that their offices are not to be held up to the same standards of accountability and control as any other entity in the human race - governmental or private.
It has been recently reported that Nancy Pelosi said that impeachment is not "worth it." Her faulty reasoning is that impeachment would take too much time because they don't have the votes. If they could "whip" their own Democratic caucus into shape to defend and protect our Constitution and the people of Iraq and our soldiers as they whupped, cajoled, threatened and browbeat the caucus into attaching "non-binding" time lines onto the last war funding bill, then impeachment would not only be possible, but likely.
The recent commutation of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's sentence, however, was the straw that broke my camel's back of exhausted ennui. Patrick Fitzgerald is a thoughtful and thorough prosecutor who did a heroic job of bringing at least one of the Bush Crime Mob to justice. Even though we were all very pleased, we knew that it was not enough and that Mr. Fitzgerald would delve deeper into the *****-infested executive branch. The lawlessness of the Bush administration has reached Wild West proportions and the inmates definitely have control of the US(A)sylum.
A very dear friend of mine, Rev. Lennox Yearwood of the Hip Hop Caucus, is being harassed by the Air Force for "Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentleman" because "The Rev" fulfills his duty as an Officer and a Gentleman honorably by protesting Iraq and the Fascist Bush Regime almost constantly. The Rev is still in the Individual Ready Reserve, so the Air Force believes it is within its parameters to pursue the charges, although every "Officer and Gentleman(woman)" should be protesting the atrocious mistakes in the Middle East. After The Rev's hearing on July 12, (in Macon, Georgia) he is going to begin a "symbolic" walk from the Reverend Martin Luther King's grave (Atlanta, Georgia) to DC - I am going to be there for him and to begin the march, but I am not going to make it symbolic.
We are going to walk from Atlanta, Georgia, to Congress beginning July 13 and ending up in DC on July 23 to send the mis-leaders back home to face the music of justice in their own districts.
It is about time us "peasants" (in the eyes of the Fascist Ruling Elite) march on DC with our "pitchforks" of righteous anger and our "torches" of truth to demand the ouster of BushCo. I have a dream of the detention centers that George has built and filled being instead filled with Orange Clad neocons and neoconnettes.
If Congress won't dig BushCo's political grave, it is the People's job to do so. Thomas Jefferson said that we need a Revolution every 20 years or so, to keep our Republic honest. Over 225 years have passed since our last Revolution (if you don't count the War Between the States) and we are long overdue for one. Turn off your TVs, kiss your pets goodbye, bring the kids and flock to the federal seat of corruption, or join us on our walk there, for a People's Accountability Movement to be in the face of the Criminal BushCo and the Complicit Congress for the last week of session before they go on their undeserved vacations (why do they get vacations when the Iraqi parliamentarians don't?)
On the eve of our first revolution: You know it's right!
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Gotta love the Brady bill.
Not his fault, he was bringing up three boys of his own.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
So its only an objectionable practice when one's son dies in a war. Gotcha
Of course not, it's just much more cowardly then. Do you see why?
Nope. Care to explain?
Quote:
I was unaware that a nation state possessing weapons of mass destruction was an appropriate reason to go to war. If this is the case, it would be appropriate to you for the US to go to war with France, China, the UK, India, Pakistan, Russia, Ukraine, Israel, North Korea, Japan, etc. etc.
Beautiful argument. However, that's not why we actually went to war with Iraq, so it's kinda irrelevant isn't it? Nice try though!
Quote:
Let's set that aside for a moment, though, and let me crystallize one part of your argument here. Are you asserting that the reason the US went to war with Iraq was because they had weapons of mass destruction? Because the people who decided to go war with Iraq are on record as disagreeing with you.
Strange. You didn't seem to know this in the last paragraph. So. Since we both agree that that's not actually why we went to war, maybe you could sprinkle some of your vast Smasharoo-knowledge upon us and perhaps clarify your position as to why our invasion of Iraq was somehow the wrong thing to do.
I ask this because it would seem to be incredibly relevant for your entire "Sheehan's son died for no reason" argument, don't you think?
Quote:
Contrary to what you may think, we likely have similar views of the uses of military power. What I find baffling is that you can somehow find invading a nation state so low on the list of both threats to US interests and human rights abuses while ignoring others that were much more oppressive and posed a far greater threat appropriate.
Where is this "list"? Isn't that just your opinion? I'm sorry, but doesn't the opinion of the US Congress matter the most? They clearly determined that the actions of Iraq justified invasion. You can debate that point all day long, and invent mystical "lists", but when you're done with that it does not change the fact that the US congress (both branches even!) voted to authorize the use of military force in Iraq.
You can invent reasons why we went to war and more reasons why those reasons are wrong. But your opinion doesn't determine whether the war was legal, nor whether the war was/is worth while. You're free to have that opinion, of course, but then everyones got one, right?
Quote:
Also that the execution of the invasion is apparently meaningless to you. Let's take it to a ludicrous extreme for a moment to establish that execution matters *at least somewhat*.
The execution of the invasion wasn't perfect. You are correct. However, it bears little responsiblity for the ongoing insurgent and militia fighting that we're seeing in Iraq today. Those are the result of political decisions. Some in Iraq. And some here in the US.
Quote:
Can we both agree that if one person was sent with a machete to invade North Korea, and that person died that his death would be without reason?
Ok. But that's also irrelevant. If that person signed up for military service, understanding that if the legal process withing his country determines that he should invade North Korea with a machete that he's obligated to do so, then that's where the issue ends.
Um... Not to mention I'm pretty sure that her son was equipped with the same stuff every other soldier had. It's not like he was singled out or anything. Also, we're talking about casualty rates lower then any other active military campaign the US has ever embarked upon. That's hardly analgous to sending a single soldier into harms way without any chance of success.
Bah. That's enough for now. Your rants are almost too easy to debunk. You're slipping in your old age Smash. Really showing it IMO...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
So, theres Gbaji...Bill O'Reilly.....Moebius......and...Bush (Not counting varus and Cheney 'cos they are obvously the same person)!
Thats 4 of you who reckon 'invading Iraq was a good idea' that tho executed imperfectly still has a chance to work out for the best, as long as the 'liberals don't feck it up.
I gotta plan ...why don't you 4 (admittedly formidable ) guys get together and take over from the troops! Let them go home. And you lot carry on the fight to 'bring democracy to the ME'!
However, it bears little responsiblity for the ongoing insurgent and militia fighting that we're seeing in Iraq today.
You are completely delusional if you can't make a connection between what is going on in Iraq today and the complete lack of plan for the aftermath of the invasion. (wich by the way was ILLEGAL). For you to even suggest otherwise is an insult to anyones intelligence.
You can invent reasons why we went to war
Umm... No that was Bush and Co's job. And you not only fell for it, you still refuse to admit that you fell for it.
Thats 4 of you who reckon 'invading Iraq was a good idea' that tho executed imperfectly still has a chance to work out for the best, as long as the 'liberals don't feck it up.
I gotta plan ...why don't you 4 (admittedly formidable ) guys get together and take over from the troops! Let them go home. And you lot carry on the fight to 'bring democracy to the ME'!
Quote:
However, it bears little responsiblity for the ongoing insurgent and militia fighting that we're seeing in Iraq today.
You are completely delusional if you can't make a connection between what is going on in Iraq today and the complete lack of plan for the aftermath of the invasion. (wich by the way was ILLEGAL). For you to even suggest otherwise is an insult to anyones intelligence.
Quote:
You can invent reasons why we went to war
Umm... No that was Bush and Co's job. And you not only fell for it, you still refuse to admit that you fell for it.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
36 posts
Gbaji, may I enter this argument with a simple question: Define the reasoning behind entering this war in Iraq. This isn't a multiple choice question, it's an essay obfuscation question...the best kind. It really is an exercise in see what I say, not why I do it. I'm not even asking you to justify, just state a coherent argument for the first move in the chess game that defines a grand historical war. It's not rocket science, but it does take political science. It's a soft science, to be sure, but it still needs some scientific method behind it's justification...don't you think...Gbaji?
gbaji wrote:
The execution of the invasion wasn't perfect.
Understatement of the year?
Quote:
However, it bears little responsiblity for the ongoing insurgent and militia fighting that we're seeing in Iraq today. Those are the result of political decisions. Some in Iraq. And some here in the US.
Yeah, of course.
I understand you guys, though.
You gotta find some way to wash the bloods off your hands. So yeah, you go blaming the liberals, the Iraqis, the Iranians, anyone but yourselves, basically.
And I don't blame you. No one wants to be responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster since Japan thought it would be a good idea to attack some naval base in the Pacific.
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
gbaji wrote:
The execution of the invasion wasn't perfect.
Understatement of the year?
Quote:
However, it bears little responsiblity for the ongoing insurgent and militia fighting that we're seeing in Iraq today. Those are the result of political decisions. Some in Iraq. And some here in the US.
Yeah, of course.
I understand you guys, though.
You gotta find some way to wash the bloods off your hands. So yeah, you go blaming the liberals, the Iraqis, the Iranians, anyone but yourselves, basically.
And I don't blame you. No one wants to be responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster since Japan thought it would be a good idea to attack some naval base in the Pacific.
Seriously, stop.
You just keep making larger and larger generalized statements, each one more ridiculous than the last in order to get some sort of woody from bob knows who.
Fix your own shi't, then worry about ours.
kanidana wrote:
Gbaji, may I enter this argument with a simple question: Define the reasoning behind entering this war in Iraq.
More than 3,000 Americans died in a cowardly attack on our homeland on 9/11. We wanted to prevent similar attacks from happening again, and Saddam was a shady ******* we'd been having trouble with for far too long. We took him out. After 9/11 , it was simply too risky to allow a nut like that to stay in power. And bear in mind, everyone agreed, including the dem presidential candidate Mr Hillary Clinton.
I know , I know, we're crazy. heard it all before.
Edited, Jul 10th 2007 10:04am by Abadd
Quote:
No one wants to be responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster since Japan thought it would be a good idea to attack some naval base in the Pacific.
No one wants to be responsible for the horrors of colonialism either, but you don't see Americans ragging you pathetic frenchies about it, so shut it.
Actually, the reason we invaded Iraq goes back further than 9/11. After the Gulf War, Iraq signed an unconditional surrender which stipulated many things, and whereupon perceiving an opportunity for improving his weakened power, Saddam Hussein ignored a great number of those many stipulated things. Say what you will, but the war was not illegal due to those transgressions of the Iraqi state against the agreed upon terms of the surrender.
Yellow cake and WMDs aside, the beginnings of and the responsibility for the Iraq War lie firmly in Saddam's now dead hands. Everything else molding this war is covered by conflicting strategic planning and intelligence, politics, and cultural/religious tides.
But let it never be said that the United States was entering into an illegal act by ousting the old Iraqi dictatorship. That is just simply incorrect.
We can argue till the cows come home that the Iraqi abrogation of the surrender was the excuse Bush was using to settle old scores, or that the intelligence was faulty or that Bush knew it was faulty and chose to act anyways-- whatever. These are issues which do not impinge on the fact that we had every right to prosecute the war we are engaged in.
Totem
Yellow cake and WMDs aside, the beginnings of and the responsibility for the Iraq War lie firmly in Saddam's now dead hands. Everything else molding this war is covered by conflicting strategic planning and intelligence, politics, and cultural/religious tides.
But let it never be said that the United States was entering into an illegal act by ousting the old Iraqi dictatorship. That is just simply incorrect.
We can argue till the cows come home that the Iraqi abrogation of the surrender was the excuse Bush was using to settle old scores, or that the intelligence was faulty or that Bush knew it was faulty and chose to act anyways-- whatever. These are issues which do not impinge on the fact that we had every right to prosecute the war we are engaged in.
Totem
ToUtem wrote:
Actually, the reason we invaded Iraq goes back further than 9/11.
However, if you allow digging up history, go back to '91 and an odd decision made just outside Basra.
The fall of Iraq was expedited by the support of a large number of Iraqis who made a deal. If they'd help us by snithching on Saddam's loyalists and pass on intelligence about troop movements, SCUD deployments etc., we would make sure Saddam was taken out so they wouldn't face reprisals.
All the intelligence points to Bush Snr., John Major, Norman Schwarzkopf and Sir Peter de la Billiere supporting this approach. At a meeting held in a tent amid the negotiation of surrender terms, Colin Powell somehow persuaded Bush & Major that now wasn't a good time for regime change.
Schwarzkopf and de la Billiere were reputedly incandescent at the stupidity of the decision, and at the betrayal of hundreds of anti-Saddam Iraqis. These Iraqis, of course, and their families were tortured and murdered by Uday & Kusay within months.
So as well as blaming the British Oil Development Company in the early 20th Century, Chirac, Bliar, Bush & Putin in 2003, I can throw Colin Powell into the mix.
Hindsight is fun.
And if you want cites, you can fUck off and learn for yourselves.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Beautiful argument. However, that's not why we actually went to war with Iraq, so it's kinda irrelevant isn't it? Nice try though!
You didn't actually read the post, did you? You just quoted my text and responded with what you thought the opposite argument would be, huh?
You're so adorable.
Strange. You didn't seem to know this in the last paragraph.
Hahaha, ahh. I mean we all knew you didn't actually read the posts, but this is just painful even to watch. I'm embarrassed for you, instead of just by you.
Also, we're talking about casualty rates lower then any other active military campaign the US has ever embarked upon.
No, we're not, and it's nowhere near close. Not lower over all, not lower per capita, nothing. Did you mean to argue that causality rates were lower than some specific conflict? Because, obviously, casualty rates here are lower than WW2 but higher than, say, Gulf 1 in every respect. Or did you plan on only qualifying engagements with higher causality rates as "active military campaigns"? That would be your standard tactic when shown to be an ignorant moron, no? Proceed, sir.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Fix your own shi't, then worry about ours.
In this case, your shi't is unfortunately my shi't.
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Fix your own shi't, then worry about ours.
In this case, your shi't is unfortunately my shi't.
Then stop with the "you" comments and make with the "us".
Recent Visitors: 358
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (358)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- So... good luck with that!
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC